But Mr Nanik thought that, as Mr Cheng is also a Hong Kong executive councillor, his comment could not be ignored.

Freedom of speech, an intrinsic value in a democratic society, is enshrined in Article 27 of the Basic Law.

Mr Cheng is entitled to his personal opinions. Executive councillors often express their own views in these opinion pages, and they can differ from the government's position. Obviously, it is up to us to decide whether such views make sense.

Mr Nanik said: 'Beijing signed the Joint Declaration in 1984 and later approved the Basic Law, which granted us full autonomy in all matters except defence and foreign affairs.'

Article 12 of the Basic Law states: 'The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be a local administrative region of the People's Republic of China, which shall enjoy a high degree of autonomy and come directly under the Central People's government.' Nowhere do I see the words 'full autonomy in all matters', as suggested by Mr Nanik.

Articles 45 and 68 stipulate the selection, by universal suffrage, of the chief executive and the election of Legislative Council members - as the ultimate aim under the principle of gradual and orderly progress. The rules and the goalposts are fixed, and it is up to the players to play the game by the rules. Therefore, Mr Nanik's accusation of moving the goalposts on this issue seems unfounded.

Mr Nanik said: 'I am very sceptical about our political destiny.' At least we agree on one point - his scepticism.

Alex F.T. Chu, Clear Water Bay

Blame the government for damaged mansion

The preservation of the King Yin Lei mansion in Mid-Levels has been a subject of hot debate in Hong Kong recently.

After public protests, the government finally stepped in and stopped further destruction of the mansion. Unfortunately, the inside and outside of the building were already damaged, and the government must take the blame for it.

The Antiquities and Monuments Office underestimated the heritage value of the 71-year-old building, raising public concerns about the office's procedure for grading monuments.

It adopted a wait-and-see approach when the building's original owner put it up for sale, instead of bidding to save King Yin Lei. Once again, the government has disappointed the public by its insensitivity towards the historical value of a Hong Kong monument.

Not long ago, the government tested Hongkongers' will when it destroyed Queen's Pier, a Central historical landmark for decades. The pier represented our collective memories: its destruction was like losing part of our history.

In both these cases, the government failed to accede to public opinion. Monuments are part of the heritage of a country or community; they belong to all of us. We all have a right to ask the government to preserve a particular historical site.

In future, when it considers grading a monument, the government should seek the views of citizens by giving out questionnaires.

A structure can be destroyed in a short space of time, but building up the historical value of an edifice can take many years.

Hilda Chan, Quarry Bay

Hoping for inspiration from new archbishop

The last Anglican archbishop of Hong Kong kept such a low profile that very few citizens even knew that his office existed, let alone that he retired last year.

Amid much pomp and ancient ceremony, a new Hong Kong archbishop, Paul Kwong, has now been installed ('Work vow from new archbishop', September 27) complete with shining golden cope and mitre.

Let us hope that he can become an inspiring leader for the diminishing Anglican community, and speak out on moral issues. As bishop, his voice was seldom heard.

He could learn a trick or two from outspoken Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun. Cardinal Zen is never afraid to speak up for the disadvantaged in our society. An invisible archbishop is as useless as a press release that is never circulated.

Rob Leung, Wan Chai

Helping parents with home-alone children

The latest case of a child being hurt when left home alone ('Home alone alarm after boy badly hurt in blaze', September 23), highlighted the need for parents to look after their children at all times.

If both parents have to go out to work but cannot find a nursery school for their children, they must try to find friends, relatives or even neighbours to take care of their youngsters.

There have been a number of these cases recently. Often they happen because the parents are very young and inexperienced when it comes to bringing up children.

These cases also highlight the lack of nursery facilities for such children. The government must provide more nursery places.

And young parents who feel out of their depth must ask for help.

Ngo Hiu-tung, Yau Yat Tsuen

TVs on our buses are wasteful and irritating

I take either the No52 or No40 minibus every day along the south side of Hong Kong island.

On Monday morning, I noticed the TV at the front of the bus - a gadget that hadn't caught my attention in months.

It was a beautiful, hot day outside, and the views rushing by were stunning; everyone was looking out the window.

Meanwhile, the screen - which was hard to see in the bright sunlight - showed repeated, cheap adverts and useless programmes with no sound and apparently no point.

What a complete waste of energy. In the bigger, double-decker buses, the Roadshow programmes are repetitive and ridiculous, running many adverts for slimming programmes and showing cartoon characters that cannot decide whether to speak English or Cantonese, and so switch between the two.

The sounds coming from the screen are high-pitched, and extremely annoying to passengers who may want to just relax before or after work.

Let's hope these 'extras' on our public transport in Hong Kong are short-lived novelties. They are a huge waste of time and electricity, and should be got rid of.

Sofie Shaw, Chung Hom Kok

Stop the destruction

Is yet another white elephant being planned for Wan Chai?

Is it reasonable to knock down the old bus station and sports centre, and replace them with an extension of the Convention and Exhibition Centre?

In trying to compete with Macau and the Pearl River Delta, do we have no other solution than to further destroy our harbourfront?

Instead, why doesn't our government improve the harbourfront with greenery, and create a haven for Hongkongers and tourists alike.

Jean Afford, Causeway Bay